In a nutshell. President Obama has been working with the new Islamist leader in Turkey to supply light and heavy weapons to Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood for the purpose of overthrowing the secularist leaning rulers in the Middle-East.

Notice only the rulers that want to maintain peace with Israel are targeted for overthrow by Obama/Turkey/MB.

Some of those weapons were used in the embassy attacks on Sept. 11, 2012 where our people were killed.

Welcome to what is likely the biggest scandal in the history of the United States.

We are sorry to say that we are not surprised by this. Rumors among global security web sites have been suggesting this is what might be going on for some time now and the evidence is coming in.

This post is long, but the evidence is clear. We will start in February 2011 and take you through the story piece by piece and when we are done, there is only one conclusion left to make. See for yourself.

UPDATE V – Center for Security Policy releases video verifying what Political Arena has said for months:

UPDATE VI – Catherine Herridge from Fox News verifies what we have said for months. Obama is shipping arms to Jihadists (the Muslim Brotherhood) in Syria …with the cooperation of Turkey.

UPDATE VII – Ambassador John Bolton: If Benghazi was an operation to send weapons to Jihadists I’m outraged.

Let us start from February 2011 as the story begins there.

It is important to remember that the Muslim Brotherhood has made serious inroads into both political parties and the State Department. In February 2011 a few conservative stalwarts such as Bill Kristol were touting the spin from the Muslim Brotherhood. He and several others actively resisted the idea that the Muslim Brotherhood was radical at all and went so far as to deny that they wanted a global caliphate. Of course anyone who looked at the history of the Muslim Brotherhood knew that Kristol was engaging in wishful thinking.

There are/were many in the State Department, elite media and some in the Republican Party who have totally bought into the propaganda from the Muslim Brotherhood–that they want peace, free elections, and so forth–when anyone who studies their history going back to WWII knows very well what their agenda is. Bill Kristol from the Weekly Standard, as well as some on the famed internet Republican Security Council, fell for the “Arab Spring” false narrative. How quickly we forget history. The Mullah’s in Iran spoke to the Carter Administration about freedom, democracy and social justice; look at what they did as soon as they got into power. The same goes for what happened in Lebanon, and then Gaza when they had elections. Now look at the disaster that is Egypt and Libya, and yet some Republicans continue to say we should help Syrian rebels with arms, which would essentially be handing Syria as well to the Muslim Brotherhood/Al-Qaeda.

Republicans would love to see a genuine democratic, pro-western revolution in the Muslim world as we had in Eastern Europe, but today many forget that it took years of cooperation between Reagan, Thatcher, and the Vatican to cultivate pro-western forces and influences in secret right under the communist’s nose. We were ready to come in with monetary, logistical and other support when those forces made a major push. We knew very well who it was we were supporting, and we had an overall strategic concept in mind. Many Republicans jumped on the Arab Spring bandwagon because they bought the pie in the sky narrative from the State Department and they really wanted to believe it. Why? Because the false narrative targeted the freedom loving sensitivities of most Republicans perfectly. In short, they selected tidbits of truth, omitted others, and made a false reality that fit ever so perfectly into an ideological box.

More serious scholars at the time called out what was obvious just as we did again and again. Here is Prof. Niall Ferguson from February 2011:

As we reported earlier the Obama Administration even went so far as to say that the Muslim Brotherhood is a secular democratic movement:

Remember when the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) said that the Muslim Brotherhood was a secular organization? – LINK. The DNI was mocked by many including Niall Ferguson (and Mark Stein below) for this preposterous testimony. It is like he swallowed the propaganda on the Brotherhood’s English web site and regurgitated it as gospel [just as the State Department has].

Then Obama came out and said that the Muslim Brotherhood should be a part of the new Egyptian Government.

The Obama administration said for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.

The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said. But by even setting conditions for the involvement of such nonsecular groups, the administration took a surprise step in the midst of the crisis that has enveloped Egypt for the last week.

So Thursday, after the train has left the station, here comes the New York Times to play catch up:

CAIRO — In post-revolutionary Egypt, where hope and confusion collide in the daily struggle to build a new nation, religion has emerged as a powerful political force, following an uprising that was based on secular ideals. The Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group once banned by the state, is at the forefront, transformed into a tacit partner with the military government that many fear will thwart fundamental changes.

It is also clear that the young, educated secular activists who initially propelled the nonideological revolution are no longer the driving political force — at least not at the moment.

As the best organized and most extensive opposition movement in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood was expected to have an edge in the contest for influence. But what surprises many is its link to a military that vilified it.

“There is evidence the Brotherhood struck some kind of a deal with the military early on,” said Elijah Zarwan, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group. “It makes sense if you are the military — you want stability and people off the street. The Brotherhood is one address where you can go to get 100,000 people off the street.”

There is a battle consuming Egypt about the direction of its revolution, and the military council that is now running the country is sending contradictory signals. On Wednesday, the council endorsed a plan to outlaw demonstrations and sit-ins.[Yup real democratic – Iran & Lebanon here we come – Editor] Then, a few hours later, the public prosecutor announced that the former interior minister and other security officials would be charged in the killings of hundreds during the protests.

Egyptians are searching for signs of clarity in such declarations, hoping to discern the direction of a state led by a secretive military council brought to power by a revolution based on demands for democracy, rule of law and an end to corruption.

“We are all worried,” said Amr Koura, 55, a television producer, reflecting the opinions of the secular minority. “The young people have no control of the revolution anymore. It was evident in the last few weeks when you saw a lot of bearded people taking charge. The youth are gone.”

And while those who believed the spin from the State Department were saying that those who had concerns that the Muslim Brotherhood would take over the country “have been proven wrong” (see video below), we were reporting that this was a disaster and that the Muslim Brotherhood was in the process of taking over Egypt and this was a huge threat to middle-east peace.

What happened to all of these freedom loving democrats that the government kept telling us about?

Political Arena Oct 11, 2011: Libya’s transitional leader says Islamic Sharia law will be the “basic source” of all law.

Political Arena October 22, 2011: Former head of CIA “bin Laden Unit”: Libyan rebels are like the Taliban. We also said once again that this entire strategic concept looks like a play to isolate Israel.

Political Arena Feb 13th: Obama proposes $800 million in aid for the Muslim Brotherhood. The appropriation was killed in Congress.

As predicted from minute one by this site and clear thinking professionals the Muslim Brotherhood took control of Egypt and announced that Jerusalem would soon be Egypt’s capital. We went on record saying that this looks like Israel is in the process of being surrounded. Political Arena from June 24:

Remember that President Obama helped oust the pro-American Egyptian government and called it “The Arab Spring”. Well now it is done and as predicted by myself, Dr. Niall Ferguson and so many others as far back as February of last year.

Watch this video from February of 2011 and look and see how this disastrous chain of events has come about just as conservatives feared. Notice what Ferguson said about a Muslim Brotherhood regime that would be aggressive towards Israel in order to unite radicalized masses under the banner of external aggression.

4 – Any student of global security full well knows that the previous pro-American government in Egypt that Obama helped to remove from power was the lynch pin for Middle-East peace. Egypt has a peace treaty with Israel that was signed by the previous government. The Muslim Brotherhood has made it clear that the treaty is shredded.

5 – President Obama’s attitude and other acts of disrespect have shown that there is a hostility towards Israel. So much so that even as far back in 2009 only 6% if Israelis saw President Obama and “pro-Israel”. See details HERE.

Political Arena July 24th: Obama Administration reverses on Jerusalem being the capital of Israel (video)

September 11th 2012: Ambassador Chris Stevens and our people at the consulate in Benghazi are killed by a mob of heavily armed Al-Qaeda terrorists an hour after the Turkish Ambassador leaves. We now know from leaked government emails that the administration knew in real time that this was a coordinated attack. We also had a drone flying overhead.

The administration invents a lie that this was a mob protest upset about an internet video that virtually nobody watched. One report said that the video had all of 17 views at the time of the attack:

Political Arena October 9th: Everything you need to know about how Obama lied about the embassy attacks in two minutes (video)

Political Arena October 17th: White House Timeline Video of Lies About Embassy Attacks

Political Arena October 20th: Obama Administration prevents military from talking to Congress about embassy killings.

Political Arena October 23th: Obama Lied. White House knew Benghazi was a coordinated terror attack as it happened (video)

John McCain on the now discovered emails that proved that the administration knew in real time that this was a coordinated attack. Notice that McCain mentions how Ambassador Stevens was meeting with the Turkish Ambassador just hours before. This video is worth watching – VIDEO.

The Obama Administration armed Libyan rebels against Qaddafi and we knew who they were because many of these fighters were fighting us in Iraq:

BAGHDAD — Saudi Arabia and Libya, both considered allies by the United States in its fight against terrorism, were the source of about 60 percent of the foreign fighters who came to Iraq in the past year to serve as suicide bombers or to facilitate other attacks, according to senior American military officials.

The data come largely from a trove of documents and computers discovered in September, when American forces raided a tent camp in the desert near Sinjar, close to the Syrian border. The raid’s target was an insurgent cell believed to be responsible for smuggling the vast majority of foreign fighters into Iraq.

Huffington Post: Anti-American Extremists Among Libyan Rebels U.S. Has Vowed To Protect.

CNN– US Intel believes some Benghazi attackers tied to al Qaeda in Iraq:

U.S. intelligence believes that assailants connected to al Qaeda in Iraq were among the core group that attacked the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, a U.S. government official told CNN.

That would represent the second al Qaeda affiliate associated with the deadly September 11 attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

Previously, intelligence officials said there were signs of connections to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the North African wing of the terror group.

The revelation that members of al Qaeda in Iraq are suspected of involvement in the Libya attack comes at a time when there is a growing number of fighters from that group also taking part in the Syrian civil war.

Hillary Clinton has paved the way for the United States to arm the Libyan rebels by declaring that the recent UN security council resolution relaxed an arms embargo on the country.

As Libya’s opposition leaders called for the international community to arm them, the secretary of state indicated that the US was considering whether to meet their demands when she talked of a “work in progress”.

The US indicated on Monday night that it had not ruled out arming the rebels, though it was assumed this would take some time because of a UN arms embargo which applies to all sides in Libya.

But Clinton made clear that UN security council resolution 1973, which allowed military strikes against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime, relaxed the embargo. Speaking after the conference on Libya in London, Clinton said: “It is our interpretation that [resolution] 1973 amended or overrode the absolute prohibition of arms to anyone in Libya so that there could be legitimate transfer of arms if a country were to choose to do that. We have not made that decision at this time.”

Dismissing concerns over possible links between Libyan rebels and al Qaeda, the Obama administration has notified Congress it is providing $25 million in nonlethal aid to the rebels’ effort to drive Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s regime from power.

“The president’s proposed actions would provide urgently needed nonlethal assistance to support efforts to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack in Libya,” said Joseph E. Macmanus, acting assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, in an April 15 letter. A copy of the letter, sent to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was obtained by The Washington Times.

The new authorization for assistance would cover “vehicles, fuel trucks and fuel bladders, ambulances, medical equipment, protective vests, binoculars, and non-secure radios,” according to a memorandum attached to the letter.

Lethal aid would be classified and not in a public notification to Congress. You can be certain they received armed aid as France and Senator John McCain have confirmed it.

France’s admission Wednesday that it provided weapons to Libyan rebels renews debate on the legality and wisdom of arming rebels in conflicts whose outcome is unpredictable.
France revealed Wednesday that its forces parachuted weapons to Libya’s rebels earlier this month, making it the first NATO country to disclose that it provided arms to rebel forces and renewing debate on the merits of such action.

The ambiguous wording of UN Resolution 1973, which authorized foreign intervention in Libya, has led to clashing interpretations of what is allowed under the guise of protecting civilians. There is no consensus on whether arming the rebels is permissible under the resolution’s guidelines. According to NATO, France is the only country to provide weapons, the Associated Press reported.

Remember that it was NATO that allegedly took the lead in planning the Libyan operation. If anyone would like to argue that France “went rogue” and did this without the support of the rest of NATO we would like to see them make such a case.

McCain Claims U.S. Armed Libya Rebels To Make Case For Arming Syrians:

And then Joe Biden let it slip that we were giving military and other aid, including training, to Syrian rebels. Gotta love Vice President Biden as he has a habit of saying just a little too much:

But Biden’s admission was not the first and his claim that these forces are not radicalized extremists is more cover.

WASHINGTON — Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats.

That conclusion, of which President Obama and other senior officials are aware from classified assessments of the Syrian conflict that has now claimed more than 25,000 lives, casts into doubt whether the White House’s strategy of minimal and indirect intervention in the Syrian conflict is accomplishing its intended purpose of helping a democratic-minded opposition topple an oppressive government, or is instead sowing the seeds of future insurgencies hostile to the United States.

“The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it,” said one American official familiar with the outlines of those findings, commenting on an operation that in American eyes has increasingly gone awry.

Syrian rebels fighting President Bashar al-Assad’s regime are now armed with man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) including US-made Stingers, Russia’s top military commander said on Wednesday.

Russia has “reliable evidence” that the rebels have the weapons, “including US-made Stingers,” but “who delivered them, we need to look into,” Army Headquarters General Nikolai Makarov said.

NBC news reported in August the rebels had been supplied with unspecified MANPADS, possibly initiated by Turkey, Saudi Arabia or Qatar which have repeatedly called for lending military support to the Syrian opposition.

US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said she could not confirm whether the rebels had been supplied with such missiles, and maintained the United States was against the uncontrolled spread of MANPADS.

Russia’s top general said Wednesday that the Syrian opposition has received shoulder-launched missiles, including stinger missiles made in the United States.

Russian chief of staff Gen. Nikolai Makarov said the missiles were a “serious matter,” although he added that he did not know where the weapons had come from.

Russia, an arms supplier to Syria, has backed Syrian President Bashar Assad throughout the conflict, and Moscow has stymied U.S. efforts in the U.N. Security Council to take stronger measures against Assad.

All of the dots are here and much of the evidence has been leaked to the press by the intelligence community which seems to have rebelled against the Obama Administration. We weren’t the only ones connecting the dots for this stomach turning conclusion.

President Obama’s once seemingly unstoppable march toward re-election hit what he might call “bumps in the road” in Benghazi, Libya, late on Sept. 11, 2012. It might be more accurate to describe the effect of the well-planned and -executed, military-style attack on a diplomatic facility there as the political equivalent of a devastating improvised explosive device on the myth of the unassailability of the Obama record as commander in chief.

Thanks to intrepid investigative reporting — notably by Bret Baier and Catherine Herridge at Fox News, Aaron Klein at WND.com and Clare Lopez at RadicalIslam.org — and information developed by congressional investigators, the mystery is beginning to unravel with regard to what happened that night and the reason for the subsequent, clumsy official cover-up now known as Benghazigate.

The evidence suggests that the Obama administration has not simply been engaging, legitimating, enriching and emboldening Islamists who have taken over or are ascendant in much of the Middle East. Starting in March 2011, when American diplomat J. Christopher Stevens was designated the liaison to the “opposition” in Libya, the Obama administration has been arming them, including jihadists like Abdelhakim Belhadj, leader of the al Qaeda franchise known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

Once Moammar Gadhafi was overthrown, Stevens was appointed ambassador to the new Libya run by Mr. Belhadj and his friends. Not surprisingly, one of the most important priorities for someone in that position would be to try to find and secure the immense amount of armaments that had been cached by the dictator around the country and systematically looted during and after the revolution.

One of the places in Libya most awash with such weapons in the most dangerous of hands is Benghazi. It now appears that Stevens was there — on a particularly risky day, with no security to speak of and despite now copiously documented concerns about his own safety and that of his subordinates — for another priority mission: sending arms recovered from the former regime’s stocks to the “opposition” in Syria. As in Libya, the insurgents are known to include al Qaeda and other Shariah-supremacist groups, including none other than Abdelhakim Belhadj.

Fox News has chronicled how the Al Entisar, a Libyan-flagged vessel carrying 400 tons of cargo, docked on Sept. 6 in the Turkish port of Iskenderun. It reportedly supplied both humanitarian assistance and arms — including deadly SA-7 man-portable surface-to-air missiles — apparently destined for Islamists, again including al Qaeda elements, in Syria.

What cries out for further investigation — and debate in the remaining days of this presidential election — is whether this shipment was part of a larger covert Obama effort to transfer weapons to our enemies that could make the Iran-Contra scandal, to say nothing of Operation Fast and Furious, pale by comparison.

Investigative journalist Aaron Klein has reported that the “consulate in Benghazi” actually was no such thing. He observes that although administration officials have done nothing to correct that oft-repeated characterization of the facility where the murderous attack on Stevens and his colleagues was launched, they call it a “mission.” What Mr. Klein describes as a “shabby, nondescript building” that lacked any “major public security presence” was, according to an unnamed Middle Eastern security official, “routinely used by Stevens and others to coordinate with the Turkish, Saudi and Qatari governments on supporting the insurgencies in the Middle East, most prominently the rebels opposing Assad’s regime in Syria.”

We know that Stevens‘ last official act was to hold such a meeting with an unidentified “Turkish diplomat.” Presumably, the conversation involved additional arms shipments to al Qaeda and its allies in Syria. It also may have involved getting more jihadi fighters there. After all, Mr. Klein reported last month that, according to sources in Egyptian security, our ambassador was playing a “central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria.”

It gets worse. Last week, Center for Security Policy senior fellow and former career CIA officer Clare Lopez observed that there were two large warehouse-type buildings associated with the so-called “consulate” whose purpose has yet to be disclosed. As their contents were raided in the course of the attack, we may never know for sure whether they housed — and were known by the local jihadis to house — arms, perhaps administered by the two former Navy SEALs killed along with Stevens.

What we do know is that the New York Times — one of the most slavishly pro-Obama publications in the country — reported in an Oct. 14 article, “Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster.”

In short, it seems President Obama has been engaged in gun-walking on a massive scale. The effect has been to equip America’s enemies to wage jihad not only against regimes it once claimed were our friends, but inevitably against us and our allies as well. That would explain his administration’s desperate and now failing bid to mislead the voters through the serial deflections of Benghazigate.

Commenting on “arms to Syria” on a panel on BBCF TV Arabic, Professor Walid Phares, a Terrorism advisor to the US Congress and the author of ‘The Coming Revolution’ said “weapons are flowing to Syria under the watch of the international community. Libya’s Islamists and Jihadists are shipping arms and ammunitions to Syria’s Jihadi networks via Turkey. Lately a ship names ‘Intisar’ unloaded aid but also weapons to Syria’s Islamist networks. We don’t know if these weapons ended in the haands of the Free Syria Army or in the hands of Jihadi militias. At the same time, Hezbollah is sending fighters to assist the Syrian intelligence and special forces in their suppressive actions against Syria’s uprising. Add to it that Iran’s regime is also supporting Assad’s regime via Iraq. The current US Administration knows about the shipments into Syria and is allowing it to happen. That is different from a US strategic move to arm and train the democratic elements of the Syrian opposition. This could happen under the next Administration, if Mitt Romney wins the election.”

UPDATE II – Newly appointed “Libya Investigators” are known Islamic sympathizers with ties to CAIR. The Blaze:

Is the man the Obama administration appointed on October 4 as key investigator for the terror attacks in Benghazi an Islamist-sympathizer? According to recently published reports, the new chairman of a State Department’s “Accountability Review Board,” which is heading the federal investigation into the Benghazi terror attacks, has been accused of being an “apologist for Islamic terrorism who has a cozy relationship with Iran.”

What’s more, the man in question — former Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering — has documented ties with the controversial group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR, of course, is a documented Muslim Brotherhood affiliate and was named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history.

To make matters worse, Pickering is also co-chairman of the board of George Soros’ International Crisis Group who has ties to other Islamic organizations as well, including the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has been described as pro-Iran “front group.”

NIAC lost what Matthew Vadum at FrontPageMag describes as ”an important defamation case in federal court last month in which it unsuccessfully argued the group was not a tool of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Pickering, who is a member of NIAC’s advisory board, formerly served as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (1997 to 2000). He was featured in a report “Rise of the Iran Lobby,” by former CIA officer Clare M. Lopez, who was recently featured on the Glenn Beck Program to discuss the motivations behind the terror-attacks on the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.

Pickering’s Islamic-connections came to light after a report by the Investigative Project on Terrorism was published, exposing what it called the “scores” of established, radical Islamists who met with senior administration officials over the course of hundreds of White House visits.

UPDATE III – Hillary tells father of Navy Slain Seal “We will have that film maker arrested”. Wow the lies are just stunning. The callousness is amazing.

That’s not all. The Hill is reporting that when House Oversight Committee Chair Darryl Issa released some of the diplomatic cables from Libya proving that they were asking for help with their security concerns the Obama Administration accused Issa of releasing the names of secret operatives in an attempt to smear him. The Obama Administration had publicly published the names of the same people in a press release in December of 2011.

One Response to Benghazigate: The Obama Administration has been arming Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood in a likely effort to isolate Israel – UPDATED!

I propose that the attack on the Embassy in Benghazi was an attempt to kidnap Stevens and hold him hostage in exchange for the release of the blind sheik who masterminded the first World Trade Center bombing. The attack was thwarted by the heroic efforts of at least two CIA officers who went back against orders to find Ambassador Stevens but ultimately lost their lives along with his. Had this kidnapping been sucessful both Obama and those who wanted the sheik’s relase would have enjoyed a win-win situation. They would have their sheik and Obama could crow that ‘”his sucessful negotiations” made it possible. I charge that the plan was coordinated and agreed upon by both parties particularly by the Administration that arranged that the embassy was not properly secured which guarenteed the success of the attack.